Through a glass darkly Measuring the social value of universities

Recommendations

Info

through the last decade – can be a compelling and attractive framework which helps to shape ways ofthinking about broader value generation. Benington and Moore, in a 2011 collection of papers on PublicValue (Public Value Theory and Practice), suggest that the Public Value Framework is even more relevantpost the 2009 global economic and financial crisis than before, with government roles and responsibilitieschanging and “…The pressure to be ‘doing more with less’ has become stronger.” 4910.5 With another reflection on the difficulties in definitions and terminologies, Benington and Moorestate that they want to sharpen the focus on ‘public value’ – which as a concept has been in danger ofdevaluation due to misuse:“[We]…aim to sharpen the definition of public value (which is in danger of being used like anaerosol, sprayed around widely but hazily, with misty meanings which can indicate different thingsto different people…”10.6 So what is the definition of ‘Public Value?’ At its most simple, public value means ‘that which isvalued by the public.’ Government and public sector organisations should have as their goal the deliveryof services that are valued and wanted, and they should be aiming to generate public value.10.7 However the process of determining ‘what the public wants’ is recognised as complex and difficult.It is also not enough for something to simply be thought to be ‘a good thing.’ At the heart of the publicvalue framework is the notion of choices and trade-offs, the drive to achieve allocative efficiency, 50devoting resources to the ‘right things’ i.e. the things that the public want, as evidenced by theirwillingness to give up something in exchange – for example taxes to pay for healthcare, or giving uppersonal freedoms to ensure broader security, Kelly et al (2002) emphasized:“It is only of value if citizens- either individually or collectively – are willing to give something up inreturn for it…if an opinion poll suggests that citizens would like government to spend more moneyon services but fails to indicate public willingness to pay for this course of action… [then this] doesnot constitute evidence that higher spending will increase public value…” 5110.8 Benington and Moore (2011) also highlight that generation of public value can be somewhatdifferent from the generation of private value (which is traditionally considered as happening throughindividual consumers making their own private choices in a freely operating market) as the generation ofpublic value is not always driven by individual choice. It has its ‘dark side’ as a key element determining‘public value’ involves the use of the power of the state, compliance and regulation. They point out, forexample, that the requirement to pay taxes or to pay fines is about the conferment of an ‘obligation’ onthe citizen rather than the delivery of a service, and the point is:“not to please or delight the client in the transaction!.... this is a very different type of encounterand different kind of relationship with the public from that typical in the private market…instead oftrying to satisfy the client, the goal is to encourage compliance with the obligation…”10.9 This is part of the ‘authorising environment in the ‘strategic triangle’ of public value as shown inFigure 7.22
Figure 7: The strategic triangle of public value creationSource: Public Value, Theory and Practice Benington & Moore 201110.10 The issue of how to decide ‘what the public wants’ and thereby enable identification of the publicsector activities or services that generate public value, shares much common ground with the issue ofhow to decide ‘what society values’ from higher education.10.11 In fact many of the principles underlying the public value framework are compatible with the‘Socially Modified Economic Valuation’ approach that we will discuss in Section 3. They are also verysimilar to those used in economic valuations such as those cost-benefit analyses recommended by the HMTreasury Green Book to be applied as part of public programme evaluations. 5210.12 The HM Treasury Green Book is a best practice guide in project and programme appraisal forall government central departments and executive agencies. It is intended to: “improve the alignmentof departmental and agency policies, programmes and projects with government priorities and theexpectations of the public...” 53 The Green Book gives recommendations and guidance on how economic,financial, social and environmental assessments should be combined and also has a number of detailedtechnical annexes including one explaining how to value non-market outputs. The Green Book is usedacross central government and compatibility with the Green Book and its sister guide the Magenta Book 54is expected in appraisals of government policies, programmes and projects.10.13 Advocates of public value generation framework have acknowledged this common ground with theTreasury Green Book and indeed some of the framework’s key proponents Kelly at al (2002) and Mulganet al (2011) draw specific attention to the usefulness of the methods employed in economic cost benefitanalysis and the Treasury Green Book in helping inform a decision process about public value generation.10.14 Mulgan (2011) also highlights the importance of finding ways to measure non-market publicservices and draws attention to another government report, the Atkinson Review 55 (ONS 2006), whichrecommended ways to identify the outputs of non-market public services so that they could be includedin the UK‘s ‘National Accounts. 56 Mulgan was clear that valuation, metrics and measurement areimportant elements in assessing public value generation:“Better metrics do not of themselves deliver better outcomes. You can’t fatten a pig by weighing it.But if you don’t have some means of weighing it you may find yourself unable to persuade othersthat it’s as fat as you believe…” Mulgan 201123
Page 1: Through a glass,darkly: Measuringth
Page 5 and 6: Introduction and rationale - backgr
Page 8: “Higher education makes a contrib
Page 12 and 13: 4.4.3 ’Inside-Out’ - this refer
Page 14 and 15: 5. Current thinking about how highe
Page 16 and 17: 6.5 The limitations of financial va
Page 18 and 19: Part 27. Measuring social value in
Page 20: 7.13 A similar message emerges from
Page 23: Figure 6: Evaluative and predictive
Page 27 and 28: 11.9 For example, a University may
Page 29 and 30: 12.2 Identification and quantificat
Page 31 and 32: 12.4 The pricing and valuation proc
Page 33 and 34: 12.5 By following through steps 1 a
Page 35 and 36: 13.10 In this example there is no d
Page 37 and 38: ConclusionsAs we have seen, the cur
Page 39 and 40: Appendix 1: Evidence matrixFigure 1
Page 41 and 42: What role do universities play in s
Page 43 and 44: Key economic reason for valuationTh
Page 45 and 46: to individuals (thorough increased
Page 47 and 48: Can we move beyond ‘narrative’
Page 49 and 50: Outcomes attempt to describe the di
Page 51 and 52: Appendix 3: BBC and public value -
Page 53 and 54: Appendix 4: Definitions of impact i
Page 55 and 56: Higher Education Statistics Agency,
Page 57 and 58: Notes1http://www.universitiesuk.ac.
Page 59 and 60: 75The Beacons for Public Engagement

Through a glass darkly Measuring the social value of universities

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?